If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

... and you have your reasons for why you did not go with other manufacturers, because they all have similar offerings ... up to a point.

I am offering a quick survey of the SONY DSLR forum to try an narrow these reasons (voluntarily, of course) and if you have something other than the offered ones, please take the time to share them with the members.

Remember, many people are relatively new to this forum and would probably appreciate different insights into their camera of choice. Please try to be as honest as decorum allows ... no swearing and remember, your kid could be reading this.

Last edited by DonSchap; 11-08-2008 at 11:45 AM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

I narrowed down my choice to either a Canon XS or XSi, a Nikon D40x or D60, or a Sony A200 or A300. I didn't have any experience with SLRs, nor did I have any lenses to use, so I basically waited for the best deal. The A300 came up for sale, and I jumped.

I still have twinges every now and then where I wonder if I should have gone Nikon or Canon because so many people use them. It's certainly harder to find useful used glass. However when I step back and think logically, I realize there is little to no difference for me. Sony offers a great selection now with the A700 and A900 on the high end, the lenses are available, finding used lenses only costs a little bit more, and I really think Sony is going to have the money and marketing to make the A-mount system into what it should have been all along. Sony might not get 1/3 of the market soon, but I expect we will increasingly go from the big 2 to the big 3, with Olympus, Pentax, etc being the small players to Sony, Canon, and Nikon's higher market share.

I should also add that the in-body image stabilization is awesome, and Sony has the only real live view system. I rarely use the live view, but on occasion it has been quite useful. Yesterday I took a shot way above my head, and the combination of image stabilization and tilting live view screen made an otherwise impossible shot fairly quick and easy.

One final, seemingly small issue, makes me like Sony a lot in the lower price range. The grip. When searching for a camera a lot of advice I got was to go and look at cameras, pick them up, and see how they feel. The right hand grip on the Nikon and Canon entry dSLRs were terrible compared to the Sony. In fact, in general the A200-350 feel a bit more solid and professional than the competition.

1. Access to top notch auto focus Zeiss lenses (prime and zoom). No other mount has this. Zeiss makes manual focus primes for Nikon and recently Canon, but I want auto focus and zoom too.

2. The ZA 135/1.8 is unique. There is no other 135 mm lens on the market that is so fast (f/1.8) and has auto focus... not to mention its stellar optical quality. This is the kind of lens you buy into a system for... much like the Nikon 14-24 and the Olympus 7-14 before it.

3. Built-in IS. Nikon and Canon have excellent systems with wide lens selection. Problem is, they use lens-based image stabilization, yet half of their lenses are not equipped with IS. Their versions of the classic pro full-frame standard zoom -- the 24-70/2.8 -- do not have IS. This is not a problem with the in-body IS with Sony.

4. Nobody else has a 24 MP body. Nikon's D3x is not going to be widely available until at least mid 2009, and it's going to cost around $5000. Their D800 probably won't be released until mid 2010. (although Canon has a 5DII coming out very soon, which is actually the A900's closest competitor... but see below)

5. Canon's 5DII looks promising, but I'm not a huge fan of their lenses on a full-frame body, except for the 70-200/IS models. The 24-70/2.8L is excellent, but no IS. Disappointingly, there's no really good wide-angle zoom available. The 17-40/4L is quite good yet not amazing on FF, and the 16-35/2.8L doesn't quite measure up to Nikon's 14-24 or Olympus' 7-14.

6. While people have complained about the noise problem at high ISO on the A900, I feel this is overblown. It may be apparent with pixel level 100% crops, as dpreview is wont to do, but who actually presents their images for viewing at 100% crop? Some people will need large prints (16 x 20" and up), which will reveal these issues, but I usually only print up to 13 x 19", and I suspect most people do as well. Besides, if you're going to have to print that big, 12 MP files aren't going to be that great either.

-------------

OTOH, I do have to say that I'm not a huge fan of Sony's Auto WB performance, in-camera processing (esp. NR and sharpening), and overall JPEG file quality. I've seen better with Nikon and especially Olympus (E-3) and Fuji (S5 Pro).

And I lament the lack of Auto ISO in Manual exposure mode. Nikon and Olympus allow you to use Auto ISO with M mode by turning it on/off via a custom setting. I find it very useful as I know what aperture (DoF) and shutter speed (control motion blur / camera shake) I want to use, and want to be able to set both of them and let the camera adjust the ISO as needed. Pentax even has an exposure mode dedicated to this. I think it's called aperture + shutter priority mode (TAv, SAv, or something).

this is my first slr, and knowing very little at the time of purchase, and i liked the ideal of the image stabilization on every lens and not having to buy the IS lenses for the canon (my other choice) now having done more research it likes as if not all the lenses are available in IS. which make me wonder is it that important to have on image stabilization all lenses? so to answer the poll question it was the image stabilization that really sold me.

SONY listened to "Joe Average"

I chose to finally go with SONY system after Canon decided to continue their rather insipid idea of not putting Image Stability inside the digital SLR camera body, literally forcing you to purchase it in every lens you mount. Canon does not even include image stabilization in many of their lenses, so this makes no sense to me and I will NOT support any company who, while knowing better, continues to perpetuate this kind of foolish nonsense in business ... and especially in MY own chosen hobby.

This was a big aspect for me to change, as I had a significant amount of investment in Canon-related products … and still own a Canon EOS-3 35mm film body.

Having come from a Minolta camera background, I was relieved to see that SONY was trying to make advancements in the Minolta product line. While the α100 was, effectively, a prototype and a band-aid to hold the Minolta camera owners … I suspected and later was rewarded with the α700’s introduction as everything the Minolta DSLR should have been. Obviously, with sensor improvement in size and shape, the α900 Full Frame is the next logical step, but the economy and price point have me a little at bay at the moment. My personal lens assortment has grown, able to use any A-mount lens and happily pass on having to use a tripod or other support for longer lenses. No matter what the lens … image stability.

I am convinced, with the current trends in technology and SONY’s commitment to producing a superior product that the next series of camera releases will be awesome.

Perhaps Nikon and Canon will, someday, get a clue and produce a camera body with anti-shake technology, but I’m not holding my breath and I just smile when I see these other product users struggling with shake, in low light, not using the rather pricey IS-equipped lenses. They had a choice … and they chose … well, something else.

SONY’s “Quick-Navi” menu, once you appreciate it, is a fast method of getting your camera set up for your next shot. The joystick on both the camera’s back AND on the vertical grip make for incredibly smooth ergonomic operation. I have yet to see this attention to detail on any other manufacturer’s camera.

Anyway … it works for me and, yeah, I’m the one who counts in this opinion. SONY has listened and made the changes for the better. Thanks, guys!

Last edited by DonSchap; 11-08-2008 at 01:16 PM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

This was pretty much a "no brainer" for me. I chose Minolta in the 70's and have never regretted it (except when they went "toes-up") and my trusty 9000 has been a worthy performer until it was stolen along with my 20mm prime and "Beercan". The "toe-rags" probably binned the 9000 and sold the lenses on ebay; the only positives are that they didn't get my favourite 28-135mm f4/4.5 and it prodded me into becoming the proud owner of an A700 body (camera that is). So choosing Sony means....

I get to use my existing lenses; [28-135mm f4/4.5][35-70mm f4][50mm f1.7][100-200mm f4.5][100-300mm f4.5/5.6 but rarely used].

Anti shake works on all these lenses, Hooray!! I used to be able to hand hold at 1/60th; advancing years put paid to that but now I may be able to dispense with the monopod, a bit less to lug around.

These two main reasons for choosing Sony are really one big reason but, if all my kit had been stolen, I think I would have still chosen Sony because of the obvious on board advantage of antishake; this vindicates Minolta's original design and makes the big two look foolish for choosing the "easy" route (or do they just make more money?). Sony's continuing association with Carl Zeiss is also a big plus and a demonstration of their committment and intent to upset the status quo. A big thanks then to Sony and "look out" Canon /Nikon.

I kind of figured that with all the new participants on the forum, filling out this survey would be a "no-brainer." It seems to be somewhat more of a challenge than I anticipated, with only seven participants, so far, this weekend.

LOL ... oh well, so much for entertainment.

Last edited by DonSchap; 11-09-2008 at 09:26 AM.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

I had been aware of Minolta from the past, had heard of Minolta glass and the 'color'. I had been a fan of Sony audio gear from back in the day when it WAS good stuff. When I started looking for a DSLR I found that it was Sony/Minolta. I spent alot of time online resaerching and reading, found this site, started reading and asking questions.Took what I felt was good advice, and here I am with my A700 and having a blast.